Pero wrote:From the POV of the student the teacher must be a Buddha, otherwise the student cannot achieve Buddhahood. If from the POV of the student the teacher is less than a Buddha then the student can only become less than a Buddha too.

I think a lot of people are going to be in a lot of trouble then.

How foolish you are, grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention! - Vasubandhu

Namdrol wrote:So, having received the Mahāmudra teachings of both Kagyu (Karma and Drikung) and Sakya (Lamdre/Yogini) and also many Dzogchen teachings, I decided for myself that Dzogchen was best, not because someone told me it was best, but because there are too many special features of Dzogchen that are unique and cannot be found elsewhere.

Nevertheless, all of these Vajrayāna teachings are profound.

Namdrol,

Can you say something on the Khon Vajrakilaya practice in terms of it's influence in Sakya? If there are pointing out instructions for Kilaya, I'm surprised that there wasn't more of a Dzogchen paradigm influence in Sakya.

How foolish you are, grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention! - Vasubandhu

Pero wrote:From the POV of the student the teacher must be a Buddha, otherwise the student cannot achieve Buddhahood. If from the POV of the student the teacher is less than a Buddha then the student can only become less than a Buddha too.

I think a lot of people are going to be in a lot of trouble then.

Hehe why is that? You think most people don't see their teacher as a Buddha?

Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.- Shabkar

Student: Hi. Thank you Rinpoche. I have heard about this gurus when I have to visualize it, don’t see them as a real person. Don’t see them as yawning and scratching. But just I am not enlightened enough to recognize a Buddha when I see it in the street. So if I see as a teacher I should not see him as a human being. And you said the opposite now. So, yes.

Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche: No no this is very good. When we say not see him as the human being, yes that is your aim. You have to think that he or she is the Buddha. You understand. But the entity itself, in order to communicate with you, let’s say your guru is like a what you think a sublime being is. With a hallow, you understand. Someone who doesn’t touch his feet when he walks on the earth, someone who flies. Someone who knows everything instantly. You know, someone who, if you have something like that, someone like that as your guru, you will not communicate. There will be no communication. We have already too many of those, how many ten thousand Buddhas, millions of Buddhas supposedly everywhere. This is not communicating. There is too many. This is like a statue you know. So the substance itself, the substance or the entity, the guru entity has to be, this is the challenge he or she has to have that human flaw and your challenge is to think that this flaw that I see is my own perception. He or she is the embodiment of the Buddha. That is your practice. We are talking about the complexity of condition. This is how human mind works. We are talking about creating a system that will dismantle all system including itself. This is the challenge.

Namdrol wrote:So, having received the Mahāmudra teachings of both Kagyu (Karma and Drikung) and Sakya (Lamdre/Yogini) and also many Dzogchen teachings, I decided for myself that Dzogchen was best, not because someone told me it was best, but because there are too many special features of Dzogchen that are unique and cannot be found elsewhere.

Nevertheless, all of these Vajrayāna teachings are profound.

Namdrol,

Can you say something on the Khon Vajrakilaya practice in terms of it's influence in Sakya? If there are pointing out instructions for Kilaya, I'm surprised that there wasn't more of a Dzogchen paradigm influence in Sakya.

Khon Konchog Gyalpo buried most of the ancestral teachings of the Khon.

A while back you commented that the Yangdak completion stage of the Khon/Kama might have been "buried." I thought you were speaking metaphorically!

'Yes.

Oh. So he didn't dig a hole back behind the monastery and throw all the pecha in, then.....that's good!

Are there Yangdak Kama sadhana's around?

That's a good question...Kongtrul's retreat manual talks about the 9 semi-circle mandala practice of Yangdak of the "So" tradition, which, IIRC, combines Terma and Kama...but I've not found any information about what this practice is, and who may still be upholding it.

May any merit generated by on-line discussionBe dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.

heart wrote:Well, I think you are all wrong here. You don't do Ngondro to get to Dzogchen, you are already in the Dzogchen teaching when you do Ngondro. Read Jigme Lingpas own commentary on the Ngondro, it is quite clear. Each part of the text finish with the instruction to dissolve the visualization and rest in the natural state. Then doing Ngondro is not about getting bored a 100.000 times, it is about refuge, bodhicitta, purification, accumulation of merit and wisdom and Guru yoga. Quite necessary things, no?

Your problem with Ngondro is just that you think to leads to Dzogchen, that is not the way it is in Dzogchen, it isn't a gradual path.